Gothic Architecture.

memory they Avere intended to perpetuate ; as is the case , for instance , Avith the tomb of King Dagohert of France , * and Avith the monument erected by the Emperor Charles IV . t at Engern , in Westphalia , to the memory of Wittehind , Duke of Saxony . The examination of the sources Avhence Ave derive our information , therefore , requires particular caution .

Later Avriters , who advance assertions , upon the authority of others , are worthy of belief only so far as they AA'ere able to draAV from the right sources , and Avere endoAA'ed Avith a correct judgment ancl capable of sound criticism . Certain it is , hoAA'ever , that the historians of the middle age , AA'ho AA'ere Avont to take upon trust , and publish AA'ith boldness the most ridiculous legendary tales as undoubted facts , are by no means calculated to inspire us AA'ith much confidence . I knoAV , from my OAA ' experience , that those

Avhich unfortunately are often the only statements extant , haA'e no greater value than popular traditions . But eA'en AA'hen a statement has been found altogether Avorthy of belief , another difficulty arises , from the circumstance of most of the ancient buildings having undergone a great many alterations , and consisting of parts AA'hose different periods ancl styles of architecture are manifest : nay , frequently not a A'estige of tho original building remains . A document concerning the erection of an edifice may

therefore be perfectly genuine , and yet the uncertainty AA'hether the work to which the document refers be really the identical building or another , and AA'hether the statement relates to the AA'hole edifice , or only to some of its parts , is not removed . In such a case , nothing but the strictest inquiry of scholars as Avell as artists of sound judgment , capable of judging IIOAV far the statements are AA'orthy of belief , can guard us against errors ; and the historian is entitled to our thanks , AA'ho , instead of copying unauthenticated matter , directs our attention to the uncertainty in AA'hich the objects of his research

are enveloped . In order to judge correctly of the internal credibility of statements concerning the history of architecture , the buildings to AA'hich they refer must not be considered singly , but in connexion AA-ith earlier , contemporary , ancl later Avorks . But aboA'e all , the history of the art is never to be separated from the history of the nation , AA'hose fate it shares alike in its progress and in its decay . Architecture , AA'hose application , more than '

that of any other art , depends on outAvardcontingencies , developes itself but skwly and gradually . The creations of the greatest genius are constantly modified by the influence of the time to AA'hich he belongs , so that the best and most perfect work can only be considered as the result of the progressive improA'ement of several generations ; ancl an accurate comparison of a series of architectural Avorks , combined AA'ith a diligent study of history , points out the only safe road on AA'hich the development of the different styles of architecture is to be pursued . After the principal periods of the improvement of the art have thus been carefully ancl critically fixed , a proper place is more easily assigned to some special , though anomalous AA'orks .

With regard to the names of the seA'eral styles of architecture AA'hich appeared in Em-ope after the decay of Eoman architecture , ancl continued till the sixteenth century , AA'hen they Avere superseded by the modern Grosco-Eoman art , they were all for a long time comprised under the general name of Gothic architecture . This epithet AA'as after-AA'ards applied to the pointed arch st yle , AA'hich predominated in the thirteenth century . At present it is Avell knoAvn that the appellation of Gothic architecture is not a suitable

one : but as those of Byzantine , Saxon , ancl German architecture , by Avhich it has been attempted to supersede it , are neither generally received , nor sufficiently distinct , I shall content myself AA'ith designating the different styles of architecture by the century ancl the country in AA'hich they flourished . In respect , however , of the question , to Avhom the merit of the invention ancl of the improvement of the art is to be ascribed , the folloAA'ing more architectural than historical observations may perhaps be of some importance in the inquiry .